Marinha dos EUA

[P44]

The Big E tradition continues: A hunk of steel from USS ENTERPRISE CVN65 has been melted down to become a part of the keel of the new ENTERPRISE CVN80.

[jambockrs]

Meus prezados
MÍDIA CHAMA NAVIOS DE GUERRA ESTADUNIDENSES DE 'MONTE DE LIXO FLUTUANTE'
Os navios de guerra costeiros dos EUA do programa Littoral Combat Ship se tornaram um "monte de lixo flutuante", informa o site Task & Purpose.

Sputnik

"Depois de terem sido gastos 16 anos e bilhões de dólares, a Marinha dos EUA parece afinal reconhecer que o programa dos navios de guerra costeiros LCS é um fracasso absoluto", diz o artigo.



LCS USS Little Rock da US Navy © AP Photo/ Carolyn Thompson

Além disso, os novos navios não são adequados para operações militares. Em 2014, os EUA foram obrigados a reduzir as encomendas de navios LCS por não estaremseguros da sua eficácia e os barcos já existentes se encontrarem sempre em trabalhos de manutenção técnica e correções.

Segundo comunicaram no Instituto Naval dos EUA, em 2018 os marinheiros norte-americanos não poderão posicionar rapidamente nenhum navio costeiro.

Entre as falhas evidentes dos LCS, a edição menciona a falta de elementos do sistema de combate, em particular, dos sistemas de radar, as capacidades limitadas da proteção contra mísseis antinavio, bem como a ausência de um mecanismo de proteção que permita reduzir os danos em caso de um impacto forte.

"Nenhuma modificação dos LCS poderá suportar um combate intenso", nota o artigo.

Antes, o Pentágono reconheceu que os navios de guerra costeiros da Marinha dos EUA se demonstraram de forma fraca em testes contra um grupo de navios de ataque pequenos, tendo revelado uma série de avarias — desde problemas com geradores e sistemas de ar condicionado até falhas do sistema de cibersegurança.

Fonte: http://www.noticiasmilitares.com.br

[P44]

[P44]

DDG 1000 in the Panama Canal, heading to her homeport of San Diego.

[cabeça de martelo]

US Navy wants future ship-killing missile for its new frigate, Raytheon says


A Kongsberg Naval Strike Missile is launched from the littoral combat ship Coronado during missile testing operations off the coast of Southern California. (U.S. Navy photo by MC2 Zachary Bell)

WASHINGTON — A competition for a new over-the-horizon missile destined to give the Navy’s littoral combat ship some teeth is being looked at for the FFG(X) program, Raytheon’s top executive said April 26.

The new missile program, which the Navy is looking to award by the end of the summer, is part of an effort to make the Navy’s littoral combat ship more survivable against high-end competitors such as Russia and China.

Thomas Kennedy, Raytheon’s chief executive officer, said in an earnings call that the Raytheon/Kongsberg submission known as the Naval Strike Missile is in a strong position for both LCS and for the future frigate.

“This is a program where, Raytheon and Kongsberg, as a team, we submitted a proposal for something we called The Naval Strike Missile, which is the Navy’s over-the-horizon weapon system that they need to put on the LCS. But turns out they’re also going to put them on all the future frigates,” Kennedy said.

“We think we’re in a very good position there,” he continued. “We have a system that requires minimum development. Some small changes we’ll make, but we can go into production very quickly, which is something the United States Navy needs. We are anticipating an award here in Q2 with significant more funds placed against it in the fiscal year 2019 budget to move forward with that program.”

The bidding for the over-the-horizon missile has been fraught with hurdles, with two major competitors dropping from the process leaving Raytheon and Kongsberg’s Naval Strike Missile as the team to beat.

Boeing’s Harpoon missile and Lockheed Martin’s Long-range Anti-Surface Missile both were pulled from the competition. The companies felt the competition was skewed towards the Raytheon/Kongsberg offering, Defense News reported in May.

The Naval Strike Missile has a range of more than 100 nautical miles and has target-recognition capabilities that in some cases limit the need for another ship or aircraft to hold a track on the target.

FFG(X)

If the Navy is indeed planning to add the over-the-horizon missile to the FFG(X), it gives some insight into how the ship’s concept is coming together.

The Naval Strike Missile is launched from canisters on deck similar to the Navy’s current anti-surface weapon, the Harpoon missile. That frees up the planned vertical launch cells for other missions.

Next summer will see a major milestone in the Navy’s new frigate competition as the Navy looks to accept proposals due in June 2019.

The Navy awarded $15 million contracts to Huntington Ingalls, Lockheed Martin, Austal USA, General Dynamics Bath Iron Works, and Italian shipbuilder Fincantieri to gin up mature designs before the Navy drops down to a single detailed design and construction contract.

All the contracts contain options that could grow the value to between $22 million and $23 million, according to the contract announcement.

Both Austal and Lockheed Martin are competing amped up versions of their littoral combat ships. Huntington Ingalls is likely offering a version of the Coast Guard’s National Security Cutter. Fincantieri is offering its FREMM design. General Dynamics is offering a patrnership with Spanish shipbuilding Navantia, for its F100 frigate.

https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2018/ ... -raytheon/

[knigh7]

http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=105453

[P44]

US Nuclear Attack Submarine USS SNOOK SSN-592 flying the Confederate Naval Jack. Courtesy Thomas Clark Jr.

[dos tempos anteriores ao politicamente correto]

[P44]

Newly-commissioned USS Manchester arrives at San Diego homeport

The recently-commissioned US Navy littoral combat ship USS Manchester (LCS 14) arrived at her San Diego homeport on June 19, completing her maiden voyage from the Austal USA shipyard in Mobile, Alabama.

The Independence variant LCS was commissioned in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, prior to her arrival in San Diego.

During her maiden voyage, the Manchester made port calls to Norfolk, Virginia, Mayport, Florida, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, and completed a successful transit through the Panama Canal.

“As Manchester plank owners, this crew spent 10 months away from homeport bringing our ship to life,” said Cmdr. Kurt Braeckel, Manchester’s commanding officer. “During that time they successfully accomplished many diverse and complex evolutions, consistently demonstrating professionalism in everything they did. It is an honor to be part of such a dedicated team and every day I find myself being inspired by their commitment to one another.”

Manchester is the 12th LCS to enter the fleet and the ninth to be homeported in San Diego. The ship will fall under Commander, Littoral Combat Ship Squadron (COMLCSRON) 1 control until assuming her role as the training ship for the future LCS Mine Countermeasures Division.

https://navaltoday.com/2018/06/20/newly ... -homeport/

[P44]

The retired USS Charles F. Adams (DDG 2), USS Ticonderoga (CG 47), and USS Yorktown (CG 48) tied up in the Reserve Basin at the old Philadelphia Naval Shipyard.

Captured: May 21, 2018

[knigh7]

Has the US Navy thought this new frigate through? New report raises questions
By: David B. Larte



https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2018/ ... questions/

[jambockrs]

Meus prezados
Marinha dos EUA concede contratos de US $ 9 bilhões para a construção novos Destroyers classe Arleigh Burke
Tradução e adaptação- E.M.Pinto
A Marinha dos EUA assinou dois contratos totalizando mais de US $ 9 bilhões os quais se destinam a construção de mais dez novos Destroyers da classe Arleigh Burke, na configuração Flight III.
Concedido em 27 de setembro, os contratos multi-anuais (MYP) 2018 – 2022 (anos fiscais), paara a General Dynamics Bath Iron Works (GDBIW) são quatro navios e para a Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII) outros seis.
O GDBIW recebeu um contrato de US $ 3.904.735.559 para a construção de quatro navios da classe DDG-51 no ano fiscal de 2019-2022. Já a HII projetará e construirá seis navios da classe DDG-51 no ano fiscal de 2018-2022 sob um contrato de US $ 5.104.668.778 (FPIF).
“Estes contratos são mais uma prova da entrega contínua de capacidade letal para a marinha e para a nação com um senso de urgência, garantindo o melhor valor para o contribuinte… A Marinha economizou US $ 700 milhões por esses 10 navios, usando contratos de compras de vários anos, em vez de uma abordagem de contratação de um ano… Também temos opções para um adicional de cinco DDG-51 para nos permitir continuar acelerando a entrega das excepcionais capacidades do DDG-51 Flight III à nossa força naval”, disse James F. Geurts, secretário assistente da Marinha para pesquisa, desenvolvimento e aquisição
Esses prêmios de aquisição de vários anos são para um total de 10 navios MYP. Além disso, o contrato de cada construtor naval contém opções para navios adicionais no AF18 / 19/20/21/22, proporcionando flexibilidade à Marinha e / ou ao Congresso para aumentar as taxas de construção do DDG-51 acima dos 10 navios MYP no pedido de orçamento para 2018, se apropriado.
“Esta aquisição fornecerá eficientemente capacidade integrada de defesa aérea e antimísseis para nossa frota futura, ao mesmo tempo em que fortalecerá nossa base industrial de construção naval e defesa… A Marinha tem orgulho de estar trabalhando ao lado dos construtores de navios dedicados da BIW e da Ingalls para continuar a entregar esses navios de guerra à frota.”disse o Capitão Casey Moton, gerente do programa de classe DDG-51
Os destróieres estão sendo adquiridos em uma configuração Flight III, confiando em um projeto de estado e maduro, ao mesmo tempo em que fornece capacidade crítica integrada de defesa antimísseis e aéreos com o radar de defesa antiaéreo AN / SPY6 (V) (1).
Fonte: Naval Today via E.M.Pinto site Plano Brasil 28 set 2018

[P44]

[P44]

Sea Platforms
US Navy ramps up development of naval unmanned systems

Michael Fabey, Washington, DC - Jane's Navy International
14 November 2018


The MDUSV prototype arrived at Joint Base Pearl Harbor Hickam on 31 October. Source: USN

The US Navy (USN) is accelerating its development of naval unmanned systems through programmatic changes and contractual tools meant to field such systems as soon as possible, according to Captain Pete Small, programme manager for Unmanned Maritime Systems.

For example, the (USN) has started the Payload Integration Group (PIG), Capt Small noted on 8 November during the Naval Submarine League Annual 36th Symposium and Industry Update.

The PIG is tasked with developing, maintaining, and overseeing and "a standard, rapid and cost-effective process" for determining what the best payloads may be for the various naval unmanned platforms, Capt Small said.

"We want to streamline efforts across multiple organisations," he said, and find ways to enhance commonalities for unmanned surface and underwater systems, as well as develop modular payloads for those systems.

The navy wants to develop interface standards, he said, to integrate unmanned and manned platforms.

The USN also has developed an unmanned underwater vehicle (UUV) family-of-systems contracting tool to provide "wide access to key industry providers" for prototyping and technology development across the portfolio of systems to be inserted in hot production lines.

Companies can be awarded contracts for various developmental tasks, he said, in areas such as payloads, hull, propulsion, sensors, and storage or conversion of energy.

While the USN looks to enhance its future naval unmanned systems development, the service remains on course for a current portfolio of programmes, Capt Small said.

For example, the service in 2018 kicked off a stronger medium unmanned surface vehicle (USC) effort to leverage programmes already being operated by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), such as the Medium Displacement Unmanned Surface Vehicle (MDUSV) prototype Sea Hunter , which arrived at Joint Base Pearl Harbor Hickam 31 October - demonstrating the MDUSV can deploy for bluewater operations.

https://www.janes.com/article/84566/us- ... ed-systems

[cabeça de martelo]

What does Lockheed Martin's version of a future frigate look like?

https://www.defensenews.com/newsletters ... look-like/

[cabeça de martelo]

More weapons

Perhaps most notably, each FFG(X) will have 32 Mk 41 vertical launch system (VLS) cells. The original threshold requirement was only 16, though it seemed likely at the time that this would grow.

This arrangement forms the core of the ship’s air defense capabilities, with the Navy still saying that the primary weapon for these cells will be quad-packed Block II variants of the RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles (ESSM). This would give the frigates a full load of 128 of these missiles.

These cells could also potentially accommodate other missiles in the future, including the increasingly capable and multipurpose Standard Missile 6 (SM-6). It is not clear whether the Navy has any requirement to install longer “strike length” Mk 41 cells on the FFG(X), which would also allow it to fire Tomahawk land attack cruise missiles. The ship’s primary air defense sensor is still set to be a three-face fixed array Enterprise Air Surveillance Radar (EASR), which you can read about more here. Variants of this radar will also go onto the future America-class amphibious assault ship USS Bougainville and some of the Ford-class aircraft carriers, beginning with the future USS John F. Kennedy.

The rest of the Navy’s desired armament package for the ships remains the same. In addition to their various missiles and anti-submarine weapons, the frigates will have a 57mm main gun capable of firing the Advanced Low-Cost Munitions Ordnance (ALaMO) guided shell, the SeaRAM close-in defense system, and various automatic cannon and machine guns.

The Navy has also now said that it wants the FFG(X) to have adequate space and power generation capacity to accommodate a 150 kilowatt solid-state laser directed energy weapon in the future. The original requirements simply called for space and power “reservation for future Directed Energy.”

A 150-kilowatt system would be a significant addition to the frigates and a major upgrade over the Navy’s existing directed energy plans more broadly. Starting in 2020, the service hopes to begin integrating the 60-kilowatt Surface Navy Laser Weapon System (SNLWS) onto much larger Arleigh Burke-class destroyers. At present, the service has a prototype 30-kilowatt system in place on the USS Portland, a San Antonio-class landing platform dock.

Whatever the power of the laser system, its primary job remains close-in protection against small unmanned aircraft, as well as small manned and unmanned surface vessels. In this latter role, it could be a helpful addition for countering swarms of small boats. Depending on the range and power of the 150-kilowatt system, it may also be able to provide an added layer of defense against incoming anti-ship missiles, as well.

Added sensors and electronic warfare systems
Beyond the main radar, the Navy still has plans for the frigates to have a robust suite of sensors and electronic warfare capabilities, as well, combined with stand-off systems on the MH-60R Sea Hawk helicopter and MQ-8C Fire Scout drone that each ship will carry. For instance, each FFG(X) will have the SLQ-32(V)6 Surface Electronic Warfare Improvement Program (SEWIP) Block II.

The SLQ-32(V)6 can jam enemy radars, as well as geolocate, identify, and classify those emitters. These latter functions give the system a significant electronic intelligence capability that gives the frigate better situational awareness of the potential threats around and allows the ship to help contribute information for analysts to use in building a larger electronic order of battle of an enemy’s force posture across a wide area.

In the presentation at the SNA conference, Dr. Campbell also indicated that the plan is now to build the frigates with the specific intent of installing a lightweight version of the future Block III system, also known as the SLQ-32C(V)7 or SEWIP Block III Lite. The standard Block III system features new active electronically scanned array (AESA) emitters of its own, which offer significantly improved capabilities improves over the earlier versions of the system.

It may be possible for this system to even fire bursts of high powered microwave energy and physically destroy the radar seekers or other electronics on incoming threats such as anti-ship missiles. You can read about more about the SLQ-32 series and the improvements coming with the Block III version here.

The contenders

As for the five individual frigate designs under development already, from what is publicly known, there has been no dramatic shifts in the general hullforms. Austal USA was the only firm to show off a model at SNA of its present proposed design, which is derived from its Independence-class LCS.

To meet the Navy’s requirements, their new frigate is nearly 40 feet longer and a foot wider. The bulk of this additional space is toward the stern of the ship and is there primarily to provide room for the 32-cell Mk 41 VLS array. The two four-round over-the-horizon missile launchers are also on the fantail.

#Austal USA was only #FFGX #frigate contender to show a full concept at #SNA last wk. Enlarged fm a year ago, mostly extended aft for more missiles. Length 456', beam 105', 21' draft. All diesels (4) for 26 knots. 32-cell VLS, 8 NSM fwd. Note redesigned bow, props vice waterjets. pic.twitter.com/RPIHYykcl5

— Chris Cavas (@CavasShips) January 21, 2019
More importantly, Austal had to dispense with the waterjet propulsion system on the Independence-class in favor of traditional drive shafts and propellers. This has been a standing Navy requirement from the beginning and the service also required that certain engine and drive chain components be sufficiently spaced apart to reduce the chances that a single hit from an opponent could leave an FFG(X) dead in the water.

These requirements have also impacted Lockheed Martin’s offering, which is derived from their Freedom-class LCS design. As a result, the company’s frigate design is also longer overall than the Freedoms.


A model of Lockheed Martin's Freedom-class-derived FFG(X) proposal that the company unveiled in 2018. Lockheed Martin has not yet released imagery or presented a model of a revised design that meets the Navy's evolved requirements, including the need for a 32-cell VLS array.

“It does require the ship to be longer, given those separation requirements and how you plan to stagger your port and starboard configuration of the combining gear/reduction gear, running into a single shaft into a screw on either side,” Joe DePietro, Lockheed Martin’s Vice President of Small Combatants and Ship Systems, told Defense News in October 2018. “You have to have a certain amount of separation and they have to be fully independent.”

Other competitors are also putting forward well-established, purpose-built frigate designs, as well. Italy’s Fincantieri Marine has put forward a derivative of its Fregata Europea Multi-Missione (FREMM) design, which it designed in cooperation with France’s Naval Group. Ships based on this design are now in service in Italy, France, Morocco, and Egypt.


A model of an anti-submarine warfare focused FREMM frigate design. Fincantieri Marine has based their FFG(X) proposal on this hullform.

General Dynamics Bath Iron Works, in cooperation with Spain’s Navantia, is pitching a version of the latter firm’s F100 frigate. Beyond Spain, Norway operates derivatives of this ship design and Australia is purchasing its own variant.

The last company involved in the FFG(X) program at present is Huntington Ingalls, which has proposed a ship based on its Patrol Frigate concept that itself derived from the Coast Guard's Legend-class National Security Cutter.


An artist's conception of Huntington Ingalls Patrol Frigate.

Already a heated competition

It’s hard to say which of these companies may be the top favorite to win the final FFG(X) deal. Austal USA and Lockheed Martin are clearly hoping to make attractive offers by leveraging existing experience and industrial capacity from their respective LCS designs, but as noted the other contenders are also proposing ships derived from in production designs.

That LCS pedigree may not ultimately be a selling point given their record of underperformance and having difficulty adapting to more complex mission sets. An initial attempt to up-gun the two LCS classes and add more capability, known as the Small Surface Combatant, resulted in designs that still lacked any real air defense capability and would be dangerously vulnerable in even moderate risk environments.

Austal USA and Lockheed Martin also built their LCS designs to meet requirements the Navy had laid out for ships conducting littoral operations closer to shore and it's unclear how adaptable they may truly be to the broader FFG(X) operating concept. The need to make significant changes, including revising the entire propulsion system, also raises the question of how similar the final designs will actually be with their predecessors.

On top of that, on Jan. 24, 2019, U.S. federal agents, including members of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) and Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS), descended on Austal USA’s shipyard in Mobile, Alabama. Authorities would not explain the reason for the raid. The company’s Australian parent is reportedly under investigation by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission for how it handled losses related to the Independence-class.



Independence-class Littoral Combat Ships under construction at Austal's shipyard in Alabama.

“Austal USA is working with the U.S. Navy on an open investigation,” the company said in a subsequent statement to USNI News. “We are unable to provide additional details due to the nature of the investigation. We are continuing business as usual, executing our existing and recently awarded contracts.”

Navantia’s F100 design may also be facing increased scrutiny after the Royal Norwegian Navy’s Fridtjof Nansen-class frigate Helge Ingstad all but sank after colliding with a tanker in November 2018. The Fridtjof Nansens are based on the F100 and share many of their basic design features.

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/26 ... as-cheaper